Skip to main content

About your Search

20121006
20121014
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)
, i'm not one who votes for something then writes the government to ask them to send us money. i did not request any stimulus money. >> report came out again today in the "ap" a pete of the "wall street journal" article for a couple years ago where you had asked for stimulus money for your district. is that report accurate? >> i never asked for stimulus. i don't recall -- i haven't seen this report so i really can't comment on it. i oppose the stimulus, because it doesn't work. it didn't work. look at just the dlfr $90. in stimulus. $90 billion in green pork to campaign contributors and special interest groups. >> i love my friend here. i'm not allowed to show letters, but go on our website, he sent me two letters saying, by the way, can you send me some stimulus money for companies here in the state of wisconsin? we sent millions of dollars. you know why he said -- >> you did ask for stimulus money. correct correct? >> sure he did. >> on two occasions we advocated your constituents applying for grants. >> i love that. this is such a bad program and he writes department of energy a l
the real internet is very dissatisfying to the government of iran. there is all sorts of stuff on the internet the iranian mullahs do not like so they've been busy closing off bits of internet to the iranian public. you can't use google. now you can't use youtube. you can't use specific sites where the government doesn't like what you can read there or what you can see there. they've been doing that forever. kind of playing with the internet. iran's government is apparently getting tired of managing the increasingly complex patchwork of things they want to block the people in their country from seeing online and so instead they have a genius idea. they are suggesting they may just close off access to the real internet all together and instead build themselves their own internal government approved internet. just for their own country. it's not really an internet. it is more like an iran-ternet. they will build their own separate but equal. ridiculous right? but you can understand that sort of controlling dictatorial impulse here that gives rise to that sort of ridiculousness. i
of discretionary money spent on anything by our government, boy howdy is there a difference here. but for a guy who wants to be thought of as cheap, as thrifty, for his campaign to be thought of as tough on spending, to be proposing that radical a spike in a pile of money that's already unimaginably enormous, to get us back to korean war levels of spending and then some, he must really have some big idea he's really committed to to justify that. to justify such a radical change in expense. he must, right? this must be something he he knows a lot about and cares a lot about. right? >> about our commitment to our military effort in terms of building a military that's prepared for the eventualities of a future that's hard to predict. back in 2008 during the presidential debates, there was no discussion of terrorism. >> no. >> and yet a year later, the world was changed. so it's very difficult to predict precisely what will develop in the the world. >> hold on. that was mitt romney today speaking to a roundtable of retired generals after his big foreign policy speech today. mr. romney is telling the re
that he wants to get rid of teachers, cops, firefighters or what he calls government workers. that's mitt romney's america. george w. bush's policies on steroids. now ask yourself the question, americans. can you get fooled again? we're a month away. think about it. that's "the ed show." i'm ed shultz. >>> "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. good evening, rachel. >> good evening my friend. thank you for staying with us this hour. there was this moment in 2008 on election night that year. i know you were watching our coverage here on msnbc, but on election night in 2008 over on the fox news channel, carl rove in the middle of fox's election night coverage was on tv gaming out john mccain's chances of pulling out a win that night. he said during their election coverage, quote, if senator mccain loses ohio he goes from 286 electoral votes, which the republicans carried in '04, down to 266 and that puts him below the 270 needed to win the white house. so he would not only need to sweep the rest of these states which were won by the republicans in '04, he would also need to pick up some
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)